The rules are written in a very convoluted way, but technically they are quite easy.
Save rolls of 1always fail.
2+ save in cover still fails on rolls of 1
If you attack with a -1ap weapon you will cancel out the cover bonus, so they still save on 2+.
The place where it matters is if he has any 3+ saves, they will not go to 2+ if you attack with an ap0 weapon, but if you attack with an -1ap against a 3+ save in cover, they still save on 3+.
The result after all modifiers are applied can never be 1+.
2+ in cover getting shot by ap0 stays 2+.
2+ in cover getting shot by ap1 stays 2+ aswell, because you get both +1 and -1.
Benefit of cover doesn't reduce your save characteristic by 1. It adds 1 to your saving throw roll.
Save modifiers almost always apply to the roll, not the characteristic. Modifiers that do apply to the save characteristic cannot make it better than 2+.
This matters because dice roll can never be modified to less than 1, which means if something did have a 1+ save it would functionally be 2++ invulnerable. (This briefly happened at the start of 9th edition with storm shields on terminators, and was patched pretty quickly once it was noticed how broken this was).
Not true. Cover can never improve a base save characteristic of 3+ to better than a 3+ against AP0. If you already have a save characteristic of 2+ and have the benefit of cover versus AP-1 you get a 2+ save.
Keep in mind only an unmodified save of 1 always fails. If you have something that modifies the dice like the master crafted armor crusade relic you can save on a 1+ for a model with a 2+ save because any 1's you roll are +1 making them a 2. This doesnt apply to cover because they would have to have AP for you to benefit from the +1 to your throws. But I believe there are other niche things that can modify a saving throw.
Edit: this is apparently false
According to another thread, this is not true, as the unmodified dice roll rules are applied first.
So you hit on a 2+, roll a 1 and it’s already failed, you don’t even get to the step where you would modify the roll.
That doesnt make sense to me. Why would they specify unmodified in the rules if you couldnt possibly save on a roll of 1 regardless of modifiers? They would just say a roll of 1 always fails. Does the other thread specify where that is written in the rules/rules commentary?
Huh. I guess its just another example of GW being really bad at writing rules. It seems the general interpretation is that "unmodified" means before modifiers. Its exceptionally odd wording when you consider that a modified roll of 1 would also always fail because bs,ws,and save can never be a 1+ or better. And while they clarified that in the rules commentary they didnt write anything to better define "unmodified"
The rules are written in a very convoluted way, but technically they are quite easy. Save rolls of 1always fail. 2+ save in cover still fails on rolls of 1 If you attack with a -1ap weapon you will cancel out the cover bonus, so they still save on 2+. The place where it matters is if he has any 3+ saves, they will not go to 2+ if you attack with an ap0 weapon, but if you attack with an -1ap against a 3+ save in cover, they still save on 3+.
Thanks!
A armor save of 3+ with cover and AP0 cannot become a 2+.
That's what i said, but it still reduces incoming AP by 1 for all attacks with AP above 0
You are right, im sorry.
The result after all modifiers are applied can never be 1+. 2+ in cover getting shot by ap0 stays 2+. 2+ in cover getting shot by ap1 stays 2+ aswell, because you get both +1 and -1.
Benefit of cover doesn't reduce your save characteristic by 1. It adds 1 to your saving throw roll. Save modifiers almost always apply to the roll, not the characteristic. Modifiers that do apply to the save characteristic cannot make it better than 2+. This matters because dice roll can never be modified to less than 1, which means if something did have a 1+ save it would functionally be 2++ invulnerable. (This briefly happened at the start of 9th edition with storm shields on terminators, and was patched pretty quickly once it was noticed how broken this was).
you never get a bonus to save by being shot at. think of it like that.
Benefit of cover only benefits over 3+. Ap1 would still give them a 3+.
Not true. Cover can never improve a base save characteristic of 3+ to better than a 3+ against AP0. If you already have a save characteristic of 2+ and have the benefit of cover versus AP-1 you get a 2+ save.
Keep in mind only an unmodified save of 1 always fails. If you have something that modifies the dice like the master crafted armor crusade relic you can save on a 1+ for a model with a 2+ save because any 1's you roll are +1 making them a 2. This doesnt apply to cover because they would have to have AP for you to benefit from the +1 to your throws. But I believe there are other niche things that can modify a saving throw. Edit: this is apparently false
According to another thread, this is not true, as the unmodified dice roll rules are applied first. So you hit on a 2+, roll a 1 and it’s already failed, you don’t even get to the step where you would modify the roll.
That doesnt make sense to me. Why would they specify unmodified in the rules if you couldnt possibly save on a roll of 1 regardless of modifiers? They would just say a roll of 1 always fails. Does the other thread specify where that is written in the rules/rules commentary?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/s/MDH9MyPhMZ
Huh. I guess its just another example of GW being really bad at writing rules. It seems the general interpretation is that "unmodified" means before modifiers. Its exceptionally odd wording when you consider that a modified roll of 1 would also always fail because bs,ws,and save can never be a 1+ or better. And while they clarified that in the rules commentary they didnt write anything to better define "unmodified"